• MEPA assesses less than 200 MT of crude oil leaked into coastal waters
• Quick identification reduced impact: SLN

Sri Lanka’s energy security vulnerabilities have been well documented over the last decade. Nevertheless, challenges with ageing infrastructure and the failure to modernise it continue to pose a risk to the supply of fuel to the island nation.

The Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) will fully replace the crude oil transfer hose involved in the recent oil spill at the Colombo Port within the first week of January 2026, according to CPC Managing Director Dr. Mayura Neththikumarage, who said that the repair work had already been planned, budgeted, and timed to coincide with a low-traffic period at the port.

Dr. Neththikumarage clarified that the component which had failed was not a fixed underwater pipeline but a rubber hose located within the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) limits, which forms part of the Single Point Mooring (SPM) system used to unload crude oil from tankers.

“The one within the SLPA is not a fixed pipeline. It is a rubber hose. It is already scheduled to be replaced entirely in January. We have one set of hoses in stock and we procured additional ones last week. We plan to carry out the replacement from 1 to 7 January 2026,” he said.

He said the work would be completed within a week and that financial provisions had already been made. “Of course, it was budgeted for. I cannot recall the exact figure at the moment, but we normally allocate funds for this purpose. The new rubber hoses have already been procured, and during a period when ship traffic is lighter, we will remove the old hose and completely replace it with a new one within one week,” he said.

Incident timeline and initial response

The crude oil spill occurred at approximately 3.30 a.m. on 14 December during unloading operations at the first SPM buoy off the Colombo Port. At the time, the Panama-registered tanker MT ASP Avana, which had arrived from the United Arab Emirates, was discharging crude oil destined for the Sapugaskanda Refinery through the CPC-operated transfer system.

Initial estimates suggested that close to 200 MT of crude oil may have entered the sea before the flow was halted. Subsequent assessments by the Marine Environment Protection Authority (MEPA) placed the figure slightly lower.

The incident triggered an immediate emergency response involving the MEPA, Sri Lanka Coast Guard (SLCG), Sri Lanka Navy, and Sri Lanka Air Force.

Navy rules out weather or sabotage

Sri Lanka Navy Spokesperson Commander Buddhika Sampath said the spill was not linked to Cyclone Ditwah or adverse weather conditions, dismissing early speculation that rough seas may have caused the failure.

“This was not caused by the cyclone. It was due to a technical failure in the pipeline, a natural issue that can occur at any time. The personnel monitoring the unloading process detected it immediately and took corrective measures, which significantly minimised the leakage,” he said.

Commander Sampath said that once the incident was reported, naval and coast guard assets were mobilised without delay. “The SLCG is specially trained and equipped for oil spill response and the Navy’s role was to assist. Once notified, we mobilised our assets to help MEPA and CPC personnel reach the site, transfer equipment, monitor the area, and provide any support that was requested,” he explained.

He also categorically ruled out sabotage. “There was no sabotage involved. To my understanding, a section of the pipeline from the ship to the buoy ruptured under pressure. They stopped the flow, controlled the leak, and replaced the damaged section,”  he said.

The Sri Lanka Coast Guard vessel SLCGS Samaraksha was deployed to the site to lay containment booms and deploy skimmers to recover surface oil, while the Air Force provided aerial surveillance to track the movement of the slick. Prevailing ocean currents and wind directions had reportedly pushed the oil slick away from the shoreline, reducing the immediate risk to beaches and coastal communities.

Investigation and penalty imposed

MEPA Chairman Samantha Gunasekara said the statutory investigation into the incident was still ongoing and involved two distinct components.

“The investigation is ongoing and part of it is complete. There are two aspects to the inquiry. With regard to the ship, we required a payment of Rs. 15 million as a penalty before releasing it after the pumping was completed, and that amount has already been recovered,” Gunasekara said.

He said the second phase of the investigation focused on petroleum infrastructure and technical causes. “The remainder of the investigation, particularly the petroleum-related part, is still ongoing because holes were observed from both sides of the pipeline. We are examining whether this was caused by internal pressure, material fatigue, or other technical factors,” he said.

When asked whether negligence or inferior materials were being considered, Gunasekara said conclusions could not yet be drawn. “I cannot say definitively because the investigation has not been finalised. Both technical factors and negligence are possibilities that are being considered at this stage,” he said.

Environmental impact assessment

Gunasekara said that MEPA’s assessment placed the volume of spilled crude oil at lower than early estimates. “We estimate it was around 175 MT, which is less than the initial estimate of 200 MT,” he said.

He insisted that environmental damage had been minimised through rapid recovery. “We collected the majority of the oil. Only a very thin layer remained and that was treated with dispersants. It was successfully controlled and the recovery operation was completed within seven to eight hours on the same day,” he said. 

He added that continuous monitoring was carried out to ensure there was no resurgence of surface oil.

CPC response and safeguards

CPC Managing Director Dr. Neththikumarage said that the corporation had acted immediately to prevent environmental harm and maintained that the incident caused no lasting damage.

“The exact quantity is still under investigation. However, there was no environmental impact. We took immediate precautionary measures. MEPA and all relevant parties inspected the site. We used dispersants to neutralise the spill, so there was no damage to the ocean,” he said.

He further noted that the exact technical cause of the failure could only be determined once external inspections were completed. “The entire pipeline supplier is currently inspecting the system. We can only state the exact reason once it provides its report. This process involves sending samples for analysis and will take some time,” he said.

Automatic safety systems and insurance

Dr. Neththikumarage stressed that the system’s safety mechanisms functioned as designed. “There cannot be major damage because these lines have automatic pressure release systems. If something goes wrong, the pressure drops and the system shuts off automatically. Only a small, contained amount is released,” he said.

He added that the CPC maintained spare equipment and contingency measures. “We have chemicals ready for immediate neutralisation of any spill, and we also keep a stock of brand-new rubber hoses at the port so that replacements can be carried out immediately if required,” he said.

Any loss of product was insured, he added. “The product is insured and any loss will be compensated,” he said.

Clarifying past funding claims

Dr. Neththikumarage also addressed claims that a $ 14 million allocation proposed in 2018 was meant for refurbishment of the crude oil pipeline involved in the spill.

“No, there was nothing like that for this crude oil line. That proposal was not for this pipeline. There are other pipeline projects that are currently underway and funds were allocated for those, not for the crude oil line involved in this incident,” he stressed.

He said that approximately Rs. 16 billion had been allocated for other fuel pipeline infrastructure projects. 

“For those other pipelines, around Rs. 16 billion has been allocated. The project is ongoing, payments are being made, and after many years of attempts, we received Cabinet approval very recently. The work is now moving forward and is expected to be completed in around three years,” he said.

Acknowledging residual risk

While defending the CPC’s preparedness, Dr. Neththikumarage acknowledged that accidents could never be fully ruled out. “Such incidents are very rare, but accidents can happen anywhere in the world. What is important is that we minimise the risk and ensure immediate response mechanisms are in place,” he said.

MEPA Chairman Gunasekara echoed this view. “There could be similar incidents in the future. We have to minimise them. All parties involved, including the CPC and subcontractors, must be more careful and take necessary precautions. There is no 100% guarantee, but we must work to reduce the possibility,” he said.

Minister of Energy Kumara Jayakody and Energy Ministry Secretary Prof. Udayanga Hemapala were unavailable for comment regarding strategies to bolster energy infrastructure resilience. Their insights were sought on mitigating the risk of major calamities, particularly in light of the challenges posed by Sri Lanka’s ageing infrastructure.

As the CPC prepares to replace the failed crude oil hose in early January and investigations continue at multiple levels, authorities maintain that the immediate threat has been neutralised. The focus now shifts to finalising investigation findings, strengthening oversight, and ensuring that Sri Lanka’s most critical energy transfer systems operate with minimal environmental risk in the future.